[SASAG] Linux Server Distro Recommendations

jeremy at 2monkeys.org jeremy at 2monkeys.org
Wed Aug 5 14:45:31 PDT 2009


Just a background question.  What does "too strict with packages" mean?

Are we talking about the difference between using prebuilt packages vs
source?

RPM dependency hell?

Or something else altogether?

>From a software management perspective, I think packaging is great.  You
know at a glance exactly what's on your system, what rev it's at, and that
all the precursors are in place.  While there was a time when I would build
from source and run make install, I'd never do that today.  If you need to
build software which is either not bundled in Your Distro of Choice or not
built the way you want it, or out of date, you can roll your own RPMs (and
.DEB packages) with a little advanced prep.  Unless you're managing a very
small number of servers, there's no way I'd go back to the old world.



On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:07:18 -0700, Atom Powers <atom.powers at gmail.com>
wrote:
> I'm a BSD guy but I have come to realize that the rest of the world is
> mostly Linux. Not really a problem, except that some vendors' software
> required Linux. (Linux compatibility mode doesn't always work.)
> 
> My question to y'all is: Which Linux distro currently provides the
> most functionality with the smallest footprint. Specifically I'm
> looking for something that resembles FreeBSD; something with a small
> "base" install and good package management that doesn't install
> packages too deeply into the OS. Most of the distros I've looked at
> are either too strict with packages (RedHat/CentOS) or install
> packages into the system directories and allow them to auto-start
> without any security configuration (Ubuntu).
> 
> What do you use, and why?



More information about the Members mailing list